Case Brief: Jaladhar Mondal v State of West Bengal

FACTS:

Initially, there were three accused persons, namely, the appellant: Jaladhar Mondal, Meghnath Mondal and Smt. Rasibala Mondal. Jaladhar Mondal is the husband of the deceased Rina Mondal and Meghnath Mondal and Smt. Rasibala Mondal respectively are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased Rina, who was married in the family of Mondals with the appellant-accused, Jaladhar. The death of Rina Mondal took place within one year of her marriage. Initially, the accused persons were charged under Section 302/201 I.P.C. alternatively under Sections 304B/398A I.P.C. The information was lodged on 25.3.88 about the death of the deceased, Rina Mondal, allegedly by catching fire at the matrimonial house. On receipt of such complaint, the local police started a specific case and thereafter getting the post mortem report from Doctor, which confirmed homicidal death of Rina Mondal, submitted charge-sheet against the appellant.

DECISION OF THE TRIAL JUDGE:

The trial court after a full-fledged trial, convicted the accused persons under Section 302/201 I.P.C. and sentenced them to suffer imprisonment for life under Section 302 and further ordered rigorous imprisonment for three years u/s 201 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each, in default to undergo further imprisonment for three months and the sentences were to run concurrently. All the accused persons were acquitted of the charges u/s 498A and 304-B IPC.

DECISION OF THE HIGH COURT:

After their conviction, an appeal was taken to the High Court by the accused persons. During the pendency of the appeal, Meghnath Mondal and Smt. Rasibala Mondal expired. However, the present appellant, Jaladhar Mondal was convicted by the High Court and the present appeal is at his instance only.

 DECISION OF THE APEX COURT:

The Court highlighted that both the trial court and the High Court found it very strange that in a case of accidental fire, nobody other than Rina Mondal suffered burn injuries and none of the three inmates of the house suffered a scratch of an injury, even though the defence case was that everybody was in the house at the time of accidental fire when the house caught fire. It was further observed that there was no evidence that any one of the inmates of the house even tried to save Rina from fire and in the process got injured. Both the courts, trial court and the High Court, have also found it very strange that in such a fire the adjoining house, which was also covered by thatched roof did not catch fire at all.

All these facts were very correctly appreciated by the trial court and also by the High Court to come to the concurrent finding that death of Rina was caused by physical strangulation and then to cause disappearance of evidence of strangulation of Rina Mondal, her body was thrown in the flames, which was not accidental. The appeal was thus dismissed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *